about DPG

Zubier Yazdani

Background

Zubier Yazdani is a partner at Deighton Pierce Glynn Solicitors. He qualified in 2002 and sits as a part time tribunal judge.

Expertise

Zubier is an expert in administrative law, civil liberties and human rights law. He has litigated in courts at all levels and deals with cutting edge litigation for which he is recognised in Chambers & Partners. He is also recommended in the Legal 500. He is a community care and actions against the police legal aid franchise supervisor.

Zubier deals with both public and private law cases. His public law cases are varied but mainly arise out of challenges for his core client group of children, young migrants and victims of trafficking. Zubier has led on the firm’s work on children’s rights and trafficking cases for over 6 years and is a recognised leading individual in the legal community for such work. Zubier has a long standing commitment to social justice. He started his practice with housing and social welfare cases and developed expertise in community care matters.

Zubier has led on developing the firm’s reputation for work for victims of trafficking and encompassing public and private law challenges for such clients. He challenges decisions that fail to recognise clients as victims of trafficking, public authorities’ breach of their investigative duty under Article 4 ECHR and tangential issues that arise from such cases. Zubier works with charities and NGOs such as Kalayaan, the AIRE centre, ECPAT UK, the Refugee Council and the Children’s Society who are either first responders or run a dedicated service for victims of trafficking. Zubier’s cases for victims of trafficking often have a strategic element to them either challenging policy or developing human rights law for this client group.

Public and private law claim arising out of unlawful detention claims also feature in Zubier’s busy practice. He is currently representing the applicant in an application to the European Court of Human Rights challenging fundamental aspects of the UK’s immigration detention regime. He also deals with unlawful detention claims for his unaccompanied minor and trafficked clients.

Sample Cases

Significant cases in which Zubier has acted include:

Gureckis v Secretary of State for the Home Department CO/1440/2017 – Acting for the AIRE centre as intervener – challenge to the categorisation of rough sleeping as an abuse of free movement rights. Judgment awaited.

MS v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 2797 (Admin) – victim of trafficking unlawfully detained for 4 months, certification of removal unlawful and refusal of s.4 support unlawful.

Reyes v Al-Malki & Anor [2017] UKSC 61 – acting for the intervener Kalayaan – residual diplomatic immunity does not cover the employment of a domestic servant. Obiter dicta: human trafficking could be a commercial activity outside the functions of a diplomat.

AIRE Centre v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2017] 1878 (Admin) – challenge to Operation Nexus, systematic verification of EEA nationals’ rights of residence and outside the scope of police powers. Decision being appealed.

R v Joseph & Ors. [2017] EWCA Crim 36 – Acting for Anti-Slavery International as intervener where the court considered whether the common law defence of duress needed to be aligned with the statutory defence under s.45 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015.

X v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 1997 (Admin), unlawful detention of an EEA national and the certification policy conceded to be unlawful in part

Chowdury v Greece [2017] ECHR 300, acting for the intervener Anti-Slavery International in a significant case where the Court clarified the scope of investigative and operational measures under Article 4 ECHR. The Court considered the control mechanisms used as a means to exploit the victims confirming that freedom of movement does not undermine allegations of control.

Sh.D and Ors v Greece and ors (App No. 14165/16) acting for the intervener, Statewatch, in respect of a claim regarding the detention of and reception conditions for five unaccompanied minors going through the Greek asylum process and whether the closure of the Balkan route by neighbouring member-states constitutes a breach of Articles 3 and 8 ECHR. Application has been communicated to the named member-states.

Ahmed v the UK (Appl.No.59727/13) – ECtHR – challenging to lack of time limits in the UK’s immigration detention regime.

R v (Kondrak) v SSHD [2015] 639 (Admin) – detention of and restrictions on working after release on an EU national held to be unlawful.

Reyes v Almalki [2015] EWCA Civ 32 – acting for the intervener in an appeal on whether diplomatic immunity affords a defence to a civil claim against a diplomat who has trafficked his domestic worker.

COL v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis (2014) – public law challenge to the decision discontinue an investigation into the trafficking of a domestic worker by her diplomat employer.

O’Leary v Upper Tribunal & SSWP (2014) – Court of Appeal – successful ‘Cart’ judicial review on the application of fairness for the purposes of ESA paper appeals before the FTT for those with a mental health condition.

JI v the Home Office (2014) – significant award of damages for an age disputed trafficked child and a challenge to the relevant policy allowing potential victims of trafficking to be detained under the DFT.

R (FZ) v London Borough of Croydon [2011] EWCA Civ 59 – Acting for the successful appellant in the Court of Appeal in an important guideline case on procedural fairness in age assessments and clarifying the test for permission in a challenge to a local authority’s decision on age.

R (KS & Ors) v London Borough of Croydon [2010] EWHC 3391 (Admin) – Instructed by the Official Solicitor for three claimants in a successful test case concerning the provision of education under s.19 of the Education Act 1996.

R (LN) v Secretary of State for Home Department (2010) – Instructed by ECPAT UK to inervene in a case concerned with the scope and applicability of Article 4 ECHR in trafficking cases